Anthropogenic Disturbance and Mojave Desert Tortoise (Gopherus Agassizii) Genetic Connectivity
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Understanding Solar Lease Revenues
LIVE WORK PLAY RETIRE TURNING LAND INTO REVENUES: UNDERSTANDING SOLAR LEASE REVENUES Reprint Date: August 25, 2020 Mayor Kiernan McManus Council Member Council Member Council Member Council Member Mayor pro tem Claudia Bridges Tracy Folda Judith A. Hoskins James Howard Adams City Manager Finance Director Alfonso Noyola, ICMA-CM Diane Pelletier, CPA Boulder City Revenue Overview Table of Contents Unlike most other municipalities and counties in Nevada, the revenue stream for Boulder City does not include the lucrative Some History . gaming tax. Prior to the recession of 2007 - 2009, the City’s • 4 • revenue stream did not have a sizable amount of monies from land leases. With the recent focus by California and more Charter/Ordinance Requirements recently at the national level on renewable energy development, • 4 • the City was in a key position to take advantage of its unique Land Lease Process position for solar development by leasing city-owned land for • 6 • energy production. Because of those prudent actions, today the Energy Lease Revenue History solar lease revenues equate to roughly 28% to 34% of the City’s • 7 • overall revenue stream to support vital governmental functions. Energy Lease Revenue Projections • • But is Land Lease Revenue Stable? 9 A common question posed to our City Council surrounds the Energy Lease Revenue Potential stability of land lease revenues. Traditional commercial or • 9 • residential land leases have many risks, as the tenants are Overall Energy Lease Revenue subject to market conditions or changes in employment. And History and Projections with recessions, these types of leases are common casualties • 10 • of a downturn in the economy. -
Utah Geological Association Publication 30.Pub
Utah Geological Association Publication 30 - Pacific Section American Association of Petroleum Geologists Publication GB78 239 CENOZOIC EVOLUTION OF THE NORTHERN COLORADO RIVER EXTEN- SIONAL CORRIDOR, SOUTHERN NEVADA AND NORTHWEST ARIZONA JAMES E. FAULDS1, DANIEL L. FEUERBACH2*, CALVIN F. MILLER3, 4 AND EUGENE I. SMITH 1Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, University of Nevada, Mail Stop 178, Reno, NV 89557 2Department of Geology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242 *Now at Exxon Mobil Development Company, 16825 Northchase Drive, Houston, TX 77060 3Department of Geology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37235 4Department of Geoscience, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154 ABSTRACT The northern Colorado River extensional corridor is a 70- to 100-km-wide region of moderately to highly extended crust along the eastern margin of the Basin and Range province in southern Nevada and northwestern Arizona. It has occupied a criti- cal structural position in the western Cordillera since Mesozoic time. In the Cretaceous through early Tertiary, it stood just east and north of major fold and thrust belts and also marked the northern end of a broad, gently (~15o) north-plunging uplift (Kingman arch) that extended southeastward through much of central Arizona. Mesozoic and Paleozoic strata were stripped from the arch by northeast-flowing streams. Peraluminous 65 to 73 Ma granites were emplaced at depths of at least 10 km and exposed in the core of the arch by earliest Miocene time. Calc-alkaline magmatism swept northward through the northern Colorado River extensional corridor during early to middle Miocene time, beginning at ~22 Ma in the south and ~12 Ma in the north. -
Mojave National Preserve Management Plan for Developed
Mojave National Preserve—Management Plan for Developed Water Resources CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT Introduction This chapter describes the unique factors that influence water resource management in the Preserve and the resources that could be affected by the implementation of any of the alternatives described in Chapter 2: Alternatives. The resource descriptions provided in this chapter serve as a baseline to compare the potential effects of the management actions proposed in the alternatives. The following resource topics are described in this chapter: • Environmental Setting • Cultural Resources • Water Resources • Wilderness Character • Wildlife Environmental setting and water resources are important for context and are foundational for water resource management, but are not resources that are analyzed for effects. Resource issues that were considered and dismissed from further analysis are listed in Chapter 1: Purpose of and Need for Action and are not discussed further in this EA. A description of the effects of the proposed alternatives on wildlife, cultural resources, and wilderness character is presented in Chapter 4: Environmental Consequences. Environmental Setting The Preserve includes an ecologically diverse yet fragile desert ecosystem consisting of vegetative attributes that are unique to the Mojave Desert, as well as components of the Great Basin and Sonoran Deserts. Topography The topography of the Preserve is characteristic of the mountain and basin physiographic pattern, with tall mountain ranges separated by corresponding valleys filled with alluvial sediments. Primary mountain ranges in the Preserve, from west to east, include the Granite, Kelso, Providence, Clark, New York, and Piute Mountains. Major alluvial valleys include Soda Lake (dry lake bed), Shadow Valley, Ivanpah Valley, Lanfair Valley, and Fenner Valley. -
C:\A Projects\AAA IBLA Decs\066IBLA\L265-268.Wpd
THOMAS CONNELLY ET AL. IBLA 81-344 Decided August 17, 1982 Appeal from decision of the Nevada State Office, Bureau of Land Management, rejecting in part oil and gas lease offer N-30806. Affirmed. 1. Oil and Gas Leases: Discretion to Lease The Secretary of the Interior may, in his discretion, reject any offer to lease public lands for oil and gas upon a determination, supported by facts of record, that the leasing would not be in the public interest because it is incompatible with uses of the lands which are worthy of preservation. APPEARANCES: C. M. Peterson, Esq., Denver, Colorado, for appellants. OPINION BY ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE BURSKI Thomas H. Connelly and Robert W. David appeal from a January 15, 1981, decision of the Nevada State Office, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), rejecting in part their oil and gas lease offer N-30806. BLM rejected the offer insofar as it concerned land in sec. 6: lots 8 and 9, S 1/2 NE 1/4, SE 1/4; sec. 7: E 1/2; sec. 18: E 1/2; and accepted the offer only as to sec. 28, all in T. 27 S., R. 63 E., Mount Diablo meridian, Clark County, Nevada. 1/ BLM listed the following reason for partial rejection: According to Stateline EAR of the Las Vegas District Office, these lands have been designated as part of the 'Highland Range Crucial Bighorn Habitat Area' (CFR 2071-1). Because these lands have been identified as crucial to the survival of a bighorn herd, they have been closed to oil, gas and geothermal exploration and leasing. -
3. Affected Environment
3. Affected Environment 3.1 Introduction This chapter provides a description of the existing social, economic, and environmental settings for the area affected by the three build alternatives and the No Build Alternative. The affected environment is described for each resource of concern in the Boulder City/ U.S. 93 Corridor Study project area. The discussion contains study methodologies, background information, descriptive data, issues, and values that have a bearing on possible impacts and mitigation measures (described in detail in Chapter 4) and on the selection of the preferred alternative. This EIS was prepared consistent with National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR 1500. et seq) and the FHWA Guidance for Preparing and Processing Environmental and Section 4(f) Documents (FHWA Technical Advisory T 6640.8A, October 30, 1987). This guidance lists potentially adverse impacts most commonly encountered by highway projects and directs that these factors should be discussed for each reasonable alternative where a potential for impact exists. Environmental and socioeconomic factors potentially impacted by the proposed project are analyzed in detail in this chapter. Factors that were found to have no potential for project-related impacts and are not discussed in this chapter are as follows: x Joint Development x Farmland x Wild and Scenic Rivers x Coastal Barriers x Coastal Zone Impacts The following additional technical studies were prepared for the Boulder City/U.S. 93 Corridor Study DEIS, and they are available through NDOT (contact Daryl James at 775/888-7013 for additional information): x Air Quality x Noise x Biological Resources x Water Quality x Wetlands x Floodplains x Archaeological Resources x Historic Resources x Land Use x Visual Resources x Economics x Social Impacts x Hazardous Waste T012004001SCO/ DRD1333.DOC/ 050740004 3-1 3. -
South Clark County Land Use Plan
South Clark County Land Use Plan Henderson Mt. Potosi Boulder Spring Mtns City NRA Sloan Red Rock NCA Sloan Canyon Eldorado National Valley Conservation Area Sandy Goodsprings Valley 161 Jean 165 Colorado River Nelson Ivanpah McCullough Range Valley Lake Mead Primm 95 National Recreation Area California Arizona Cottonwood Cove 164 Searchlight Lake Mojave Goodsprings & Sandy Valley Cal-Nev-Ari Citizens Advisory Councils Palm & Searchlight Gardens 163 Town Advisory Board Laughlin Adopted - December 5, 2012 Effective - January 9, 2013 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Clark County Board of Commissioners: Mark Silverstein, Department of Aviation Susan Brager, Chair Margie Yatson, Clark County Fire Steve Sisolak, Vice-Chair Department Larry Brown Linda Perri, Clark County School District Tom Collins Lebene Aidam-Ohene, High Impact Projects Chris Giunchigliani Manager Mary Beth Scow Denis Cedarburg, Public Works Lawrence Weekly Kevin Eubanks, Regional Flood Control Julie Chadburn, Water Reclamation District Planning Commission: Kathleen Blakely, Park Planning Vivian Kilarski, Chair Justin Williams, Park Planning Edward Frasier, III, Vice-Chair J. Christopher Dapper Office of County Manager: Greg Esposito Don Burnette, Manager Randy Miller Randall J. Tarr, Assistant Manager Dan Shaw Ed Finger, Assistant Manager Donna Tagliaferri Jeff Wells, Assistant Manager Goodsprings Citizens Advisory Council: Department of Comprehensive Planning: Elizabeth Warren, Chair Nancy Lipski, Director Monica Beisecker, Vice-Chair Jon Wardlaw, Planning Manager Theodore Louis Compton -
DESERT TORTOISE COUNCIL 4654 East Avenue S #257B Palmdale, California 93552 [email protected]
DESERT TORTOISE COUNCIL 4654 East Avenue S #257B Palmdale, California 93552 www.deserttortoise.org [email protected] 12 March 2014 Mark Slaughter, Assistant Field Manager Bureau of Land Management, Southern Nevada District Office 4701 North Torrey Pines Drive Las Vegas, NV 89130, [email protected] RE: Proposed release of captive desert tortoises into the Piute-Eldorado Critical Habitat Unit, Clark County, Nevada Dear Mr. Slaughter: The Desert Tortoise Council (Council) is a private, non-profit organization comprised of hundreds of professionals and laypersons who share a common concern for wild desert tortoises and a commitment to advancing the public’s understanding of this species. Established in 1976 to promote conservation of tortoises in the deserts of the southwestern United States and Mexico, the Council regularly provides information to individuals, organizations and regulatory agencies on matters potentially affecting the desert tortoise within its historical range. The Council formally asked the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to consider us as an Interested Party in the translocation and population augmentation of tortoises into southern Nevada on 14 September 2012 (letter available upon request). What is the status of our request? Are we currently considered an Interested Party for this and other tortoise-related issues on public lands managed by the BLM in Nevada? In September 2012 there was no indication that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) intended to release up to 600 captive tortoises onto BLM lands in the Piute-Eldorado Critical Habitat Unit. The Council only incidentally heard about this intended release at the recent Council Symposium held in Ontario, California on 21-23 February 2014. -
U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management
U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Final Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2010-0091-EA November 2014 Southern Nevada Intertie Project APPLICANT Great Basin Transmission, LLC GENERAL LOCATION Clark County, Nevada BLM CASE FILE SERIAL NUMBER N-086359 PREPARING OFFICE U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Las Vegas Field Office 4701 N. Torrey Pines Drive Las Vegas, Nevada 89130 Phone: (702) 515-5172 Fax: (702) 515-5010 This page intentionally left blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1. Identifying Information ...................................................................................... 1-2 1.1.1. Title, EA Number, and Type of Project .............................................. 1-2 1.1.2. Location of Proposed Action ............................................................... 1-2 1.1.3. Name and Location of Preparing Office ............................................. 1-2 1.1.4. Identify the Case File Number ............................................................ 1-2 1.1.5. Applicant Name ................................................................................... 1-2 1.2. Purpose and Need for Action ............................................................................. 1-2 1.2.1. Background ......................................................................................... 1-2 1.2.2. BLM Purpose and Need ..................................................................... -
Airborne Radiometric Maps of Mountain Pass, California Purposes Only and Does Not Imply Endorsement by the U.S
U.S. Department of the Interior Scientific Investigations Map 3412–C U.S. Geological Survey 115°35’ 115°30’ 115°25’ 115°35’ 115°30’ 115°25’ INTRODUCTION percent; for eTh, from −0.74 to 180.20 ppm, with a mean of 8.16 ppm; and for eU, from REFERENCES CITED −0.22 to 17.03 ppm, with a mean of 2.03 ppm. Negative concentrations were obtained Geophysical investigations of Mountain Pass, California, were conducted as part of DeWitt, E., Kwak, L.M., and Zartman, R.E., 1987, U-Th-Pb and 40Ar/39Ar dating of the 35°35’ EXPLANATION 35°35’ over water or some alluvial deposits. Verplanck and others (2014) provided a deposit an effort to study regional crustal structures as an aid to understanding the geologic Mountain Pass carbonatite and alkalic igneous rocks, southeastern California: 6a Quaternary alluvium model for carbonatite- and alkaline-intrusion-related REE mineralization, and they framework and mineral resources of the eastern Mojave Desert. The study area encom- Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, v. 19, no. 7, p. 642. Quaternary gravel described some of the geophysical tools used to assess these deposits. These radiogenic 5b passes Mountain Pass, which is host to one of the world’s largest rare earth element International Atomic Energy Agency, 2003, Guidelines for radioelement mapping using Granitic rocks, undivided features are briefly discussed below (from northwest to southeast), and their locations are 5a (REE) carbonatite deposits. The deposit is found along a north-northwest-trending, gamma-ray spectrometry data: International Atomic Energy Agency, Technical Ivanpah Valley labeled on the maps and figure 1 (for example, locs. -
California Desert Conservation Area Plan Amendment / Final Environmental Impact Statement for Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System
CALIFORNIA DESERT CONSERVATION AREA PLAN AMENDMENT / FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR IVANPAH SOLAR ELECTRIC GENERATING SYSTEM FEIS-10-31 JULY 2010 BLM/CA/ES-2010-010+1793 In Reply Refer To: In reply refer to: 1610-5.G.1.4 2800lCACA-48668 Dear Reader: Enclosed is the proposed California Desert Conservation Area Plan Amendment and Final Environmental Impact Statement (CDCA Plan Amendment/FEIS) for the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System (ISEGS) project. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) prepared the CDCA Plan Amendment/FEIS for the ISEGS project in consultation with cooperating agencies and California State agencies, taking into account public comments received during the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. The proposed plan amendment adds the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System project site to those identified in the current California Desert Conservation Area Plan, as amended, for solar energy production. The decision on the ISEGS project will be to approve, approve with modification, or deny issuance of the rights-of-way grants applied for by Solar Partners I, 11, IV, and VIII. This CDCA Plan Amendment/FEIS for the ISEGS project has been developed in accordance with NEPA and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. The CDCA Plan Amendment is based on the Mitigated Ivanpah 3 Alternative which was identified as the Agency Preferred Alternative in the Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement for ISEGS, which was released on April 16,2010. The CDCA Plan Amendment/FEIS contains the proposed plan amendment, a summary of changes made between the DEIS, SDEIS and FEIS for ISEGS, an analysis of the impacts of the proposed decisions, and a summary of the written and oral comments received during the public review periods for the DEIS and for the SDEIS, and responses to comments. -
Boulder City, Nevada City Manager Page 1
BOULDER CITY, NEVADA CITY MANAGER PAGE 1 BOULDER CITY, NEVADA CITY MANAGER BOULDER CITY, NV (Population: 16,207) Located 30 minutes from Las Vegas airport, Boulder City is a delightful and unique desert town located in the southern tip of Nevada. Boulder City enjoys a distinctive heritage, with its roots beginning with the implementation of one of the most significant public works projects in history -- the Boulder Canyon Project, a monumental federal undertaking resulting in the construction of Hoover Dam. Boulder City is a beautiful high oasis in the desert (elev. 2,400 ft.) with green lawns and many clean, tree-shaded streets overlooking man-made Lake Mead and the Lake Mead Recreation Area. The Safewise report for 2020 has “Clean, Green Boulder City” as the safest city in Nevada. The City of Boulder City is known as the city that housed over 4,000 workers during the construction of Hoover Dam (1931 to 1935). It remains home to some of the families of original Dam workers, fondly called the “31-ers”. The city was supervised and regulated by the Federal Bureau of Reclamation and all land in an around the city was owned by the federal government. In 1958, the federal government passed the Boulder City Act and established an independent municipal government, Boulder City. Under this Act, the federal government turned over the existing government reservation site (approximately 33 sq. mi. of land) and the utility system to the residents of Boulder City. Following many years of extremely rapid growth, in 1979 the city adopted a controlled growth ordinance for the purpose of controlling the rate and distribution of development throughout the community to ensure the adequacy of the City’s facilities and services within acceptable allocation of City revenues. -
Request for Time-Critical Removal Action at Goldome Mill, Mojave
SFUND RECORDS CTR 2162820 ^^..eosr,,^^ S ^^M^V^ -Z. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY % ^SM- " REGION IX \^"*^NOw ^ 75 Hawthorne Street ^^PRo^^^ San Francisco, CA 94105 MEMORANDUM 'JUL 1 1 2008 SUBJECT: Request for a Time-Critical Removal Action at Goldome Mill, Mojave National Preserve, San Bernardino County, California FROM: Craig Benson, On-Scene Coordinator Ertiergency Response Section (SFD-9-2) TO: Daniel Meer, Chief Response, Planning & Assessment Branch (SFD-9) THROUGH: Steve Calanog, Acting Chief ^'^^^^ Emergency Response Section (SFD-9-2) I. PURPOSE The purpose of this Action Memorandum is to obtain approval to spend up to $264,000.00 in direct costs to mitigate threats to human health and the environment posed by uncontrolled hazardous substances (cyanide, ignitable materials, corrosive liquids and solids and metal bearing wastes) present at the Goldome Mill (the "Site"). The Site is located near Ivanpah Road, approximately nine miles west of the Nevada/California state line, in San Bernardino County, California. The proposed removal of hazardous substances would be taken pursuant to Section 104(a)(1) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ("CERCLA"), 42 U.S.C. § 9604(a)(1), and Section 300.415 of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan ("NCP"), 40 C.F.R. § 300.415. II. SITE CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND Site Status: Non-NPL Category of Removal: Time-Critical CERCLIS ID: assignment pending AM approval SITE ID: assignment pending AM approval A, Site Description 1. Physical location The 40-acre Site is situated on patented private land within the Mojave National Preserve on the western slope of the New York Mountains located on the eastern edge of the Ivanpah Valley.